ŞÂFİÎ MEZHEBİNDE “TARÎK” KAVRAMININ KULLANIMI VE İŞLEVİ
Yükleniyor...
Dosyalar
Tarih
2022
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
Kilis 7 Aralık Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Şâfiî mezhebinin gelişiminin önemli merhalelerinden biri, hicri dördüncü asır itibariyle ortaya çıkan ve “tarîk” diye isimlendirilen Irak ve Horasan şeklindeki ekolleşmedir. Şâfiî fıkhının daha iyi anlaşılması açısından Şâfiî fakihlerin kullandıkları bu ıstılahlardan tam olarak ne kast ettikleri, oluşan ekolleşmenin ne zaman ve nasıl başladığı, farklı yönlerinin neler olduğu, ne tür sonuçlar doğurduğu, bunları tek çizgide birleştirme çabalarının nasıl geliştiği ve kimler tarafından buna katkı sunulduğu hususlarının incelenip araştırılması büyük önem arz etmektedir. Bu sebeple “tarîk” kavramı, tarîklerin ortaya çıkışı ve bunlara mensup fakihler, tarîkler arasındaki ihtilafın mahiyeti, bunları telif veya birini tercih ve tercihte kullanılan ifadeler incelenmiştir. Nevevî’nin söylediklerinden anlaşılan tarik ve türevleri, mezhepteki farklı kavil, vecih, tahric ve tercihlerin rivayet ve aktarımı ile ilgili oluşan ihtilafın bir neticesi olarak ortaya çıkan bir kavramlaşmadır. Yani Şafiî fakihlerden biri bir konuda “iki kavil veya iki vecih var” derken diğer biri “bir tek kavil” veya “bir tek vecih var” derse ya da biri bir konuda “mutlak ihtilaf var” derken diğeri “konunun izah gerektirdiğini” söylerse, mezhebin aktarımında tarik manasında bir ihtilaf oluşmuş demektir. Şâfiî fakihlerin ifadelerinden çok sayıda tarikin oluştuğu anlaşılmakla birlikte belirli bir isimle anılmış olup bilinen iki tarik bulunmakta olup bunlar Irak ve Horasan tarikleridir. Nevevî’nin ifade ettiğine göre, Şâfiî’nin açık ifadelerini, mezhebinin kaidelerini ve ilk dönem Şâfiî fakihlerin görüşlerini aktarma noktasında Irak tarikine mensup fakihler, Horasan tarikine mensup fakihlerden daha sağlam ve başarılıdır. Horasanlılar ise genelde aktardıkları bu metinler üzerindeki tasarruf, araştırma, tefrî‘ ve düzenleme hususlarında Iraklılara göre daha başarılı olup bunları daha güzel işlemişlerdir. Şâfiî’nin bıraktığı fıkıh birikimi, onun talebeleri ve sonraki müntesipleri tarafından devam ettirilmiş ve Ebû İshak el-Mervezî’ye kadar mezhep tek çizgi şeklinde gelişimini sürdürmüş, tarik şeklindeki ayrışma ise onun talebeleriyle başlamıştır. Bunlardan Bağdat’ta tedris faaliyetini sürdürmek üzere hocasının yerine geçen Ebu’l-Kâsım ed-Dârekî ile Merv’de ders halkası tesis eden Ebû Zeyd el-Mervezî’ye tariklerin ortaya çıkması nispet edilebilir. Zira Bu iki fakihten sonra gerek Bağdat’ta gerekse Horasan’da iki tarik artık belirginleşmiş ve tarikin imamı olarak nitelenen şahsiyetler ortaya çıkmıştır. Irak tarikinin imamı Ebû Hâmid el-İsferâyînî ve Horasan tarikinin imamı Ebû Bekr el-Kaffâl es-Sağîr kabul edilmektedir. Bunların ardından yaklaşık üç yüz yıl boyunca yetişen fakihlerin çoğu ve onların ortaya koydukları eserler bu iki tarikten biriyle irtibatlı olmuştur. Bunun neticesi, iki tarik arasında, sonraki fukahâyı rahatsız edecek şekilde, çok sayıda ihtilaf noktası ortaya çıkmıştır. Bu ihtilaflar, çeşitli düzeylerde olup, her zaman tam bir zıtlık şeklinde değilse de kimi zaman birinin söylediğinin tam tersini diğeri ifade eder tarzda olmuştur. Bu durum bazı Şafiî fukahâsının, ellerindeki çok sayıda eserde bulunan vecih ve tarikler arasındaki farkları giderme, onları uzlaştırma ameliyesine başvurmalarına sebep olmuştur. Bu manadaki ilk teşebbüs Ebû Ali es-Sincî ile başlamış, Cüveynî, Rûyanî, Gazzâlî, İmranî, Mu‘âfî ve İbnü’s-Salâh ile devam etmiştir. Tarikler arası uzlaştırma çabası içine girip bunu daha ileri bir seviyeye ulaştıran fakihlerden biri Râfiî olup onun faaliyetleri Nevevî’nin bu konudaki çalışmalarına temel teşkil etmiştir. Kendisinden önceki bu uzlaştırma çabalarından da istifade eden Nevevî, Râfiî’den farklı olarak, her iki ekolün dışından ikisine de tarafsız bir bakış açısıyla yaklaşmıştır. Eserlerinde o, Irak ve Horasan ayırımını açık bir şekilde, Irakiyyûn ve Horasaniyyûn ifadelerini sık sık kullanarak ifade etmekte ve bunları telif veya tercih etmektedir. Mezhebin aktarımındaki ihtilafı ifade eden tariklerin arasındaki karşıtlığı dile getirip onları uzlaştırmaya çalışan Râfiî ve Nevevî, mezhepte mutemet olan, tercih edilen görüşü ifade etmek için genelde el-mezhep ıstılahını kullanmışlardır.
One of the important stages of the development of Shāfi’ī madhhab is the schooling of Irāq and Khorasān, which emerged as of the hijri fourth century and is called “ ṭarīq”. For a better understanding of Shafi’i fiqh, research for what exactly Shāfi’ī faqeehs mean by these terms, when and how the schooling started, what its different aspects are, what kind of results it has, how the efforts to combine them in a single line developed and who contributed to it will be examined is of great importance. For this reason, the concept of “ṭarīq”, the emergence of ṭarīq and the faqīḥs who belong to them, the nature of the conflict between ṭarīqs, the expressions used in choosing and choosing one or the other were examined. Ṭarīq and its derivatives, understood from what Nawawī said, is a conceptualization that emerged as a result of the conflict that occurred about the narration and transmission of different qawil, wajih, takhrīj and preferences in the madhhab. That is if one of the Shāfi’ī faqīḥs says “there are two qawils or two wajihs” on a subject, and the other says “there is only one qawil” or “only one wajih”, or if one says “there is absolute disagreement” on a subject and the other says “the subject requires explanation” it means that there has been a conflict in the meaning of ṭarīq in the transmission of madhhab. Although it is understood from the statements of Shāfi’ī faqīḥs that there are many ṭarīqs, there are two known ṭarīqs, which are called with a certain name and these are Irāqī and Khorasān ṭarīqs. According to Nawawi, faqīḥs belonging to the Irāqī ṭarīq are more robust and successful than the faqīḥs of the Khorasān ṭarīq in conveying the clear expressions of Shāfi’ī, the principles of madhhab and the views of the early Shāfi’ī faqīḥs. Khorasānians, on the other hand, was more successful than Irāqis in terms of disposition, research, interpretation and arrangement of these texts, and they processed them better. The knowledge of fiqh left by Shāfi’ī was continued by his students and later followers, and the madhhab continued to develop in a single line until Abu Ishaq alMarwazī, and the separation in the form of ṭarīq began with his students. Among these, the emergence of ṭarīqs can be attributed to Ebu al-Qāsim ad-Dārekī, who replaced his teacher to continue his teaching activities in Baghdad, and Abu Zeyd al-Marwazī, who established a teaching circle in Marw. Because, after these two faqīḥs, two ṭarīqs became evident both in Baghdad and Khorasān, and personalities described as the imams of the ṭarīqs emerged. Abū Hāmid sl-Isferāyini’s accepted as the imam of the Irāqī ṭarīq and Abū Bakr al-Qaffāl al-Sageer is accepted as the imam of the Khorasān ṭarīq. After these, most of the faqīḥs who grew up for about three hundred years and the works they produced were related to one of these two ṭarīqs. As a result, many points of disagreement arose between the two ṭarīqs, disturbing the later faqīḥs. These conflicts were at various levels, and although not always in complete opposition, they sometimes expressed the opposite of what one said to the other. This situation caused some Shāfi’ī faqīḥs to reduce the differences between wajihs and ṭarīqs in their many works, and to engage in reconciliation activities. The first attempt on this subject started with Abū Alī al-Sincī and continued with Juwaynī, Rūyani, Ghazzālī, Imrānī, Muāfi and Ibn al-Salāh. One of the faqīḥs who tried to reconcile the ṭarīqs and brought it to a higher level was Rāfi’ī, and his activities formed the basis of Nawawi’s studies on this subject. Benefiting from these reconciliation efforts before him, Nawawī, unlike Rāfi’ī, approached both of them from an impartial point of view from outside of both schools. In his works, he clearly expresses the distinction between Irāq and Khorasān by using the expressions Irāqiyūn and Khorasāniyyūn, and he prefers them. Rāfi’ī and Nawawī, who tried to reconcile and express the opposition between the ṭarīqs expressing the conflict in the transmission of Madhhab, generally used the term al- madhhab to express the preferred view that is the fiduciary in the madhhab.
One of the important stages of the development of Shāfi’ī madhhab is the schooling of Irāq and Khorasān, which emerged as of the hijri fourth century and is called “ ṭarīq”. For a better understanding of Shafi’i fiqh, research for what exactly Shāfi’ī faqeehs mean by these terms, when and how the schooling started, what its different aspects are, what kind of results it has, how the efforts to combine them in a single line developed and who contributed to it will be examined is of great importance. For this reason, the concept of “ṭarīq”, the emergence of ṭarīq and the faqīḥs who belong to them, the nature of the conflict between ṭarīqs, the expressions used in choosing and choosing one or the other were examined. Ṭarīq and its derivatives, understood from what Nawawī said, is a conceptualization that emerged as a result of the conflict that occurred about the narration and transmission of different qawil, wajih, takhrīj and preferences in the madhhab. That is if one of the Shāfi’ī faqīḥs says “there are two qawils or two wajihs” on a subject, and the other says “there is only one qawil” or “only one wajih”, or if one says “there is absolute disagreement” on a subject and the other says “the subject requires explanation” it means that there has been a conflict in the meaning of ṭarīq in the transmission of madhhab. Although it is understood from the statements of Shāfi’ī faqīḥs that there are many ṭarīqs, there are two known ṭarīqs, which are called with a certain name and these are Irāqī and Khorasān ṭarīqs. According to Nawawi, faqīḥs belonging to the Irāqī ṭarīq are more robust and successful than the faqīḥs of the Khorasān ṭarīq in conveying the clear expressions of Shāfi’ī, the principles of madhhab and the views of the early Shāfi’ī faqīḥs. Khorasānians, on the other hand, was more successful than Irāqis in terms of disposition, research, interpretation and arrangement of these texts, and they processed them better. The knowledge of fiqh left by Shāfi’ī was continued by his students and later followers, and the madhhab continued to develop in a single line until Abu Ishaq alMarwazī, and the separation in the form of ṭarīq began with his students. Among these, the emergence of ṭarīqs can be attributed to Ebu al-Qāsim ad-Dārekī, who replaced his teacher to continue his teaching activities in Baghdad, and Abu Zeyd al-Marwazī, who established a teaching circle in Marw. Because, after these two faqīḥs, two ṭarīqs became evident both in Baghdad and Khorasān, and personalities described as the imams of the ṭarīqs emerged. Abū Hāmid sl-Isferāyini’s accepted as the imam of the Irāqī ṭarīq and Abū Bakr al-Qaffāl al-Sageer is accepted as the imam of the Khorasān ṭarīq. After these, most of the faqīḥs who grew up for about three hundred years and the works they produced were related to one of these two ṭarīqs. As a result, many points of disagreement arose between the two ṭarīqs, disturbing the later faqīḥs. These conflicts were at various levels, and although not always in complete opposition, they sometimes expressed the opposite of what one said to the other. This situation caused some Shāfi’ī faqīḥs to reduce the differences between wajihs and ṭarīqs in their many works, and to engage in reconciliation activities. The first attempt on this subject started with Abū Alī al-Sincī and continued with Juwaynī, Rūyani, Ghazzālī, Imrānī, Muāfi and Ibn al-Salāh. One of the faqīḥs who tried to reconcile the ṭarīqs and brought it to a higher level was Rāfi’ī, and his activities formed the basis of Nawawi’s studies on this subject. Benefiting from these reconciliation efforts before him, Nawawī, unlike Rāfi’ī, approached both of them from an impartial point of view from outside of both schools. In his works, he clearly expresses the distinction between Irāq and Khorasān by using the expressions Irāqiyūn and Khorasāniyyūn, and he prefers them. Rāfi’ī and Nawawī, who tried to reconcile and express the opposition between the ṭarīqs expressing the conflict in the transmission of Madhhab, generally used the term al- madhhab to express the preferred view that is the fiduciary in the madhhab.
Açıklama
Anahtar Kelimeler
İslam Hukuku, Şâfiî Mezhebi, Tarik, Irak – Horasan tarikleri, Tercih, Islamic Law, Shāfi’ī Madhhab, Tarīq, Irāqi - Khorasān ṭarīqs, Takhrīj
Kaynak
Kilis 7 Aralık Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi
WoS Q Değeri
Scopus Q Değeri
Cilt
9
Sayı
1
Künye
NAS T (2022). ŞÂFİÎ MEZHEBİNDE “TARÎK” KAVRAMININ KULLANIMI VE İŞLEVİ. Kilis 7 Aralık Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(1), 63 - 88. 10.46353/k7auifd.1085598
